The data collection technique that was used in this study was interviews. The interviews were semi structured so as to ensure that the researcher was able to generate data in response to her research questions (see Appendix 3- interview schedule). According to Creswell (2008), semi structured interviews are those that ask similar questions amongst the participants, however, individual questions may arise per participant. Maree (2007) asserts that interviews are the best
32
technique to use when a researcher wants to know and understand the world view of a person through their eyes. The pre-set open ended questions assisted in eliciting information from the participants. Five interviews were conducted in total within three days. Interviews for this study were conducted during the vacation period so as to not interfere with the participants’ study commitments.
The interviews were conducted in a quiet office on the UKZN (PMB Campus), and this ensured that the participants were interviewed in a safe and contained environment. The interviews lasted between 40-60 minutes each, and the participants were found to be very forthcoming with their personal accounts. Rapport was easily established with the researcher, and it is probable that this was because the researcher was a contemporary and peer of many of the participants. In contrast, being a peer of research participants may also pose certain ethical challenges in the research process. For example, the researcher was aware that her peers who participated in the study may have felt (peer) pressured to participate in the study. To offset this potential ethical challenge, the researcher reiterated to her participants that participation in the study was voluntary and that participants could and should discontinue their participation if they so wished. Participants were also reminded that their discontinuation of participation would not lead to any adverse consequences.
Two of the participants had some difficulties with expressing themselves thoroughly in English and thus they spoke IsiZulu and English interchangeably. However, this did not pose a problem or a barrier in understanding their accounts because the researcher is fluent in both isiZulu and English and could understand all the accounts. The researcher encouraged all the participants to speak and express themselves in a language they felt comfortable with.
An audio recording device was used to record the interviews as it afforded the researcher the opportunity to be fully present in the process of interviews. The participants granted the researcher permission to audio-record the interviews (see Appendix 1 – refer to the consent form). Furthermore, Terre Blanche and Kelly (1999) state that an audio recording device is appropriate for conducting interviews as it allows the researcher to not write the conversation word for word and therefore be distracted. Additionally, participants did not incur any financial costs (e.g., taxi fare) by taking part in this research. Refreshments were served during the interview. The refreshments were given not for the purpose of enticing people to participate in the study but as a form of appreciation for the time that the participants spent in the interviews.
33 3.5 Ethical Considerations
3.5.1 Pre Data Collection.
Ethical clearance was obtained for the study before it commenced. The researcher submitted a proposal for the study and it was approved by the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee (see Appendix 7 – HSSREC approval for the study). McFadyen and Rankin (2016) assert that getting permission from gatekeepers is important as they usually have control over who has access to certain individuals or places. Given that the study involved students, gatekeeper’s permission was obtained from the UKZN Registrar (see Appendix 5 – Gatekeepers permission). In addition, in the event that any participant became distressed as a result of their participation in the study, the psychological services of the Child and Family Centre (CFC) were secured (see Appendix 6-letter from CFC)
3.5.2 During Data Collection.
The following ethical issues mentioned in this section were taken into account when the study was conducted. According to Terre Blanche, Durrheim, and Painter (2006) the protection of an individual’s confidentiality is an important part in doing research.
The researcher therefore explained the concept of confidentiality to the participants and further mentioning the limitations to confidentiality. One of the limitations to this confidentiality was that their transcripts were to be discussed or accessed by the researcher’s supervisor. However, the researcher further explained that a breach to confidentiality would not mean that their identity would be known as anonymity would still be kept.
Anonymity was kept by providing the participants with pseudonyms. This ensured that no one (other than the researcher) would be able to trace back which responses belonged to which participant. Before each interview commenced, the researcher read the information sheet (see Appendix 2) with each participant. The information sheet contained information about the study, interview process and recording, confidentiality and use of information and storage of information. The purpose for reading this information sheet was to ensure that the participant was fully informed about the entire process and the study so that they could utilise the information they get about the study to make an informed decision of participating or not in the study. Following the
34
explanation of the information sheet the participants all agreed to proceed with the study and were provided with consent forms (see Appendix 1).
The researcher explained, as per consent form, that participation in the study was voluntary and that they could withdraw from the study at a later stage should they wish.
All these participants were above the age of 18 and so they could sign and consent on their own without having to go through that process of obtaining their guardian’s signature. Other ethical issues relevant to this study were storage of information. The participants’ were assured that their accounts were to be kept in a locked and protected cupboard in the supervisor’s office. The researcher furthermore ensured that the participants knew that all unnecessary risks towards them were removed, and that the benefits of the study outweighed or minimised the risks involved (Glesne, 1999).